Drive Letter Problem - Vista Installation

[cyranodesade]

All,
I was wondering if anyone knows how to install Vista where the OS
partition uses the D: Letter and not C:

I normally install my OS as fallows:
C: temp directory (page File) (Primary Partition) (Fat32)
D: Windows Directory (Logical Drive) (NTFS)
E: Programs (Logical Drive) (NTFS)
F: Data Files (Logical Drive) (NTFS)

I've gotten use to this structure and would like to continue it...
however when I did my first install of Vista (I did it from my WinXP
installation) Vista took the drive letter I had temporarily assigned
the partition Z:. My second attempt was booting to the setup disk but
Vista took the C: drive Letter and assigned the Primary Partition a
drive letter of D:.

I would like the install to be as followes:
C: temp directory (page File) (Primary Partition) (Fat32)
D: Vista Directory (Logical Drive) (NTFS)

I realize this is a little anal but... If anyone can help it will be
much appreciated. Thanks in advance. - CES

 

[Malke]

All,
I was wondering if anyone knows how to install Vista where the OS
partition uses the D: Letter and not C:

I normally install my OS as fallows:
C: temp directory (page File) (Primary Partition) (Fat32)
D: Windows Directory (Logical Drive) (NTFS)
E: Programs (Logical Drive) (NTFS)
F: Data Files (Logical Drive) (NTFS)

I've gotten use to this structure and would like to continue it...
however when I did my first install of Vista (I did it from my WinXP
installation) Vista took the drive letter I had temporarily assigned
the partition Z:. My second attempt was booting to the setup disk but
Vista took the C: drive Letter and assigned the Primary Partition a
drive letter of D:.

I would like the install to be as followes:
C: temp directory (page File) (Primary Partition) (Fat32)
D: Vista Directory (Logical Drive) (NTFS)

I realize this is a little anal but... If anyone can help it will be
much appreciated. Thanks in advance. - CES

You should install the operating system the way you like. Ask your
question in one of the Vista newsgroups, though.

microsoft.public.windows.vista.general
microsoft.public.windows.vista.administration_account
microsoft.public.windows.vista.hardware_devices
microsoft.public.windows.vista.installation_setup
microsoft.public.windows.vista.mail
microsoft.public.windows.vista.networking_sharing
microsoft.public.windows.vista.performance_maintenance
microsoft.public.windows.vista.print_fax_scan
microsoft.public.windows.vista.security

Malke

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

I was wondering if anyone knows how to install Vista where the OS
partition uses the D: Letter and not C:

I normally install my OS as fallows:
C: temp directory (page File) (Primary Partition) (Fat32)
D: Windows Directory (Logical Drive) (NTFS)
E: Programs (Logical Drive) (NTFS)
F: Data Files (Logical Drive) (NTFS)

I've gotten use to this structure and would like to continue it...

I don't have enough experience with Vista to reply to your question, but I'd
like to comment on the structure that you apparently like.

First, you say say you put the Temp directory (page file) on C:. If that
means you think the temp directory is the same as the page file, you are
very much mistaken; they are two different things.

Second, putting either the page file or the temp folder on a the same
physical drive as Windows, but in a different partition, is
counterproductive The thing that most slows down use of the page file is
moving the drive heads to and from it. Putting the page file on a second
partition on your only (or main) drive puts it far from the other
frequently-used data on the drive, increases the time it takes to get to and
from it, and negatively impacts performance.

Putting the page file on another *physical* drive, on the other hand,
normally increases performance. A good rule of thumb is that the page file
should be on the most-used partition of the least-used physical drive.

The same is true of the temp folder.

Third, separating installed programs on a partition different from the one
Windows is installed on is usually done by people who think that if they
ever have to reinstall Windows, they will at least be able to keep their
programs. However this is not true. Except for an occasional very small
simple program, all programs have entries referring to them in the registry
(as well as elsewhere). If you reinstall Windows, all those entries are
lost, and the program won't work For that reason there is generally no
benefit in such separation.

Separating data from Windows can be useful for many people. My view is that
most people's partitioning scheme should be based on their backup scheme.
If, for example, you backup by creating a clone or image on the entire
drive, then a single partition might be best. If, on the other hand, you
backup only your data, then the backup process is facilitated by having all
data in a separate partition.

Rarely, if ever, does a partioning scheme with more than two partitions make
sense, except for those running multiple operating systems.

Realize that any time you create more partitions than you actually need, you
aare creating artificial size boundaries that don't need to exist. Folder
boundaries dynamically grow and shrink as needed to meet your changing
needs, but partition boundaries are static and fixed (and require special
software to change). That means that every time you have an extra partition
that doesn't help you, you run the risk of running out of space on one
partition while still having lots of room left on others. This risk should
be run only if the partition structure is one that's beneficial, but not for
trivial reasons.

 

[R. McCarty]

If you do an upgrade the pre-existing drive letter assignments should
be preserved. However, if you do a fresh install where multiple disks
and partitions pre-exist there is no provision to designate drive letters.
Post install you can use DiskMgmt.Msc to re-letter non Vista volumes
but not the Vista (System) partition itself.

Since Vista is nearing completion, I can't guarantee that this functionality
won't change before the RTM is reached.

 

[Quanta]

I am reading this correctly? Vista has no provision to rename
drive/partition letters?

 

[Tony Sperling]

Ken,

I agree with most of this, the OP's set-up is really strange. But I think
there is more determination than misconception behind this - the TEMP (TMP)
directory is not of much use in the Windows world wheras in UNIX it is one
of the core system directories. I guess CES has developed a kind of specific
use for this. To absolutely want to have it on the C: partition, though?

I have experimented a lot with the Swap File over many Windows versions. To
put it on the most used partition of the least used drive is a new one to
me. This is interesting, have to try that. What I have found to be most
important is to put the swap file on the fastest drive. Then, I usually make
a rather small swapfile on the system partition, and one of the recommended
size on each of the other partitions that I have found to be required.

Two partitions is mostly too little, I think. At least for a Home Desktop
Machine. For Back-Up and recovery purposes using CD's and DVD's, I think
that would put a strain on the Back-Up planning. ( or, MY B/U planning! )

There are many misconceptions about the swapfile, I think. It used to be
that no data is ever swapped - if it becomes redundant, it is dumped. Code
is swapped! If data was put on the swapfile it would become overused and the
whole purpose of having one would be defeated. This means that most of the
conceptions that are floating around about the swapfile and it's use is
mythology. Many are aggravated about the amount of space that it eats, but
what is the eaqual of your average RAM to your average HD space? It simply
is meaningless. The system itself probably uses the swapfile the most, but
there is no benefit in reserving huge space there since the information that
is stored is already of a volatile nature and can be overwritten without
much impact after a few minutes, large applications may use it less often
but most likely with more roomy material that may be expected to have a
longer duration - so, as I said - I have found a small system partition
swapfile usefull and one larger but secondary swapfile on each of the other
partitions. And the system partition (C: drive!) on the fastest drive, if
possible.

Everybody today is speaking of how the system swaps data, if this has
changed ( old habbits do that ) please correct me, I simply cannot keep up
with the pace of change everywhere.


Tony. . .

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

I have experimented a lot with the Swap File over many Windows
versions. To put it on the most used partition of the least used
drive is a new one to me. This is interesting, have to try that.

Again, the thing that most slows down use of the page file is moving the
drive heads to and from it.

What
I have found to be most important is to put the swap file on the
fastest drive.

Since most people have only a single drive, that isn't usually an issue, and
even if they have more than one, they are usually identical.

But in cases where you have two dissimilar drives, I'll grant you that using
the faster one is an advantage. Whether that advantage outweighs the
advantage of having it on the least-used physical drive (and thereby
minimizing head movement) is another story. It perhaps depends on how much
faster than the other drive(s) it is.

My guess is that in more cases than not, having it on the least-used drive
is more significant, but I certainly wouldn't object to someone trying it
both ways to which which wored better in *his* situation.

But over and above all of this, these days, most of us have enough RAM so
that page file use is very low, and in practice, where you put it just isn't
as important as it used to be.

Two partitions is mostly too little, I think. At least for a Home
Desktop Machine. For Back-Up and recovery purposes using CD's and
DVD's, I think that would put a strain on the Back-Up planning. ( or,
MY B/U planning! )

That depends on your backup strategy. I'm not particularly fond of backing
up to CD/DVD. My strategy, and the one I normally recommend, is imaging the
entire drive to an external hard drive. In that scenario, even a single
partition will work fine for most people.

 

[Rock]

All,
I was wondering if anyone knows how to install Vista where the OS
partition uses the D: Letter and not C:

I normally install my OS as fallows:
C: temp directory (page File) (Primary Partition) (Fat32)
D: Windows Directory (Logical Drive) (NTFS)
E: Programs (Logical Drive) (NTFS)
F: Data Files (Logical Drive) (NTFS)

I've gotten use to this structure and would like to continue it...
however when I did my first install of Vista (I did it from my WinXP
installation) Vista took the drive letter I had temporarily assigned
the partition Z:. My second attempt was booting to the setup disk but
Vista took the C: drive Letter and assigned the Primary Partition a
drive letter of D:.

I would like the install to be as followes:
C: temp directory (page File) (Primary Partition) (Fat32)
D: Vista Directory (Logical Drive) (NTFS)

I realize this is a little anal but... If anyone can help it will be
much appreciated. Thanks in advance

Post to a vista newsgroup.

news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.windows.vista.general

Or on the web
http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/communities/newsgroups/en-us/default.mspx

 

[Rock]

I am reading this correctly? Vista has no provision to rename
drive/partition letters?

Neither Vista or XP can re-letter the boot or system partitions.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

Since there is a 64bit edition of Vista this IS a Vista newsgroup.

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

This IS a Vista newsgroup. Anyone with 64bit questions may post here
regardless of the platform. This ng is platform agnostic.

 

[Rock]

This IS a Vista newsgroup. Anyone with 64bit questions may post here
regardless of the platform. This ng is platform agnostic.

Post to a vista newsgroup.
news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.windows.vista.general

Or on the web
http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/communities/newsgroups/en-us/default.mspx

Lol...missed seeing that. Oh well.

 

[miss-information]

The word "agnostic" comes from the Greek a (without) and gnosis (knowledge).
So, "platform agnostic" makes no sense. Also, agnostic is a religious
concept.

mi